3 ms·
Non-removable batteries are annoying, but they allow you to make devices which are much more compact, or which have a larger battery at the same size. The batt
by Wowfunhappy 5y ago
Non-removable batteries are annoying, but they allow you to make devices which are much more compact, or which have a larger battery at the same size.
The battery in e.g. an iPhone 6S takes some work to replace, but it's still quite easy for a repair shop to do, so that seems like a very reasonable trade-off to me.
- andrei_says_ 5y agoWhat about non-removable batteries that are also glued in? With a excessive amount of glue? Making them doubly non-removable?
- hutzlibu 5y agoThere is the valid argument, of sealing it in, for water protection. I am still looking for a new phone, which removable battery.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago> There is the valid argument, of sealing it in, for water protection. There is an argument, perhaps, I don't know about a "valid" one. The difference between "the battery can be swapped with a screw driver" and "the battery can be swapped by a repair shop in 15 minutes" isn't really that large, so if it can make devices more compact, sure, why not? Batteries that outright can't be replaced are something else entirely. Maybe some consumers are willing to make the trade, but it's environmentally irresponsible. The Airpods in particular really piss me off given all of Apple's environmental messaging.
- the_pwner224 5y agoThat is incorrect. The Samsung Galaxy S5 had a removable battery and headphone jack and was still waterproof. It was a $550 phone and was a flagship with the latest hardware/performance stuff, so clearly this was practical from a cost/manufacturing standpoint. Waterproofing is not a valid reason against having removable batteries or ports.
- Wowfunhappy 5y agoThat is a totally different story! No, I for one am not okay with that at all.